0241 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [352 words]

Here is the extracted text from the image:

91002241

"Mr. Dorsey, I was arguing to the jury the evidence."
"The Court: Did you make a statement to that effect?"
"Mr. Dorsey, I made a statement that those two young ladies
say they met Holloway as he left the factory at 11:05—I make the
statements that as soon as they track down to that Greek
cafe, Quinn came in and said to them, 'I have just been in and
seen Mr. Frank'."
"Mr. Arnold: They never said that, they said they met Hollo-
way at 11:45, they said at the Busy Bee cafe, but they met Quinn
at 12:30"
"Mr. Dorsey, Well, get your record, you can get a record on
almost any phase, this busy Quinn was blowing hot and blowing cold,
no man in God's world knows what he did say, but I got his
affidavit there."
"Mr. Arnold: I have found that evidence, now, Mr. Dorsey,
about the time those ladies saw Quinn."
"Mr. Dorsey: I'll admit he swore both ways"
"Mr. Arnold, No, he didn't either. I read from the evidence
of Miss Corinthia Hall; Then Mr. Dorsey asked her: 'Then you
say you saw Lemmie Quinn right at the Greek cafe at five min-
utes to twelve, something like that? A. No sir, I don't remember
what time it was when I saw him. He came into the cafe, ordered
sandwiches and a cup of coffee, drank the coffee and when we
were waiting on the change he came in'. And further on, 'All he
said (Quinn) was he had been up and had seen Mr. Frank, that
was all he said' A. Yes sir, and so on. Now the evidence of
Quinn: 'What sort of clock was that? he's telling the time he
was at DeFoor's pool parlor—What sort of clock was that?'
A Western Union clock. Q. What did the clock say when you
looked at it? A. 12:30'. And he also swore that he got back
to the pencil factory at 12:30, that's in a half dozen different
places".
"The Court: Anything contrary to that record, Mr. Dorsey?
"Mr. Dorsey: Yes, sir, I'm going to show it by their own
fable that didn't occur—that don't scare anybody and don't
change the facts."
The Court erred, under the foregoing facts, in not restraining
158